On 8/11/06, Steve Bennett <stevagewp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I don't like this middle ground at all. We need to
be firmly either
*for* or *against* paid editing. If we equivocate as we currently do,
then you'll have people figuring out which articles are coming through
this process and AfDing them all "because Jimmy said it was a conflict
of interest". Either welcome it or ban it - where the hell do we stand
right now?
Whats so hard about "we welcome text which is good, no matter who or
how it was created and we reject or repair text which is bad."?
For or against paid editing? Paid editing is an orthogonal issue. I
wish all of our contributors could be better compensated for their
fantastic contributions.
If we can't cope with bias coming from known-interested sources then
we have no hope... most biased sources do not announce their
intentions.